sharkmano2 wrote:But the south to which Kennedy was referring was the global economic south, which is a phrase used in economics and political science to refer to the third world.

michael24easilybored wrote:

GetOutOfMyHeadRandall wrote:Oh, and may I add that for somebody who is so pathetically pedantic about JFK's geography skills, you've missed a mistake in your own comic. You said that you're half a century late. Half a century is fifty years. The speech was forty-nine years ago.

Stick to your standards, you fuckwitted hack of a cartoonist.

I fully endorse this.

And as said earlier, he meant what is referred to as 'the south' by economists, ie what used to be the third world. Stop being such pedants.

Step away from your globes for a minute and look at the standard Mercator projection map of the world that is unfortunately still very dominant. It has Germany in the dead center. This pushes the equator way down, and all of the named places do indeed appear to be in the southern part of the world. (If we take "Asia" to have the USSR subtracted from it.)

LucasBrown wrote: "Also, if you read his speech at Rice, all his arguments for going to the moon work equally well as arguments for blowing up the moon, sending cloned dinosaurs into space, or constructing a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars."

Well, I'm convinced. When do we start the mission to build penis-shaped obelisk on Mars?

I'm fairly certain that the southern half of the globe is everything that's south of me, just as conservatives are everyone more asshole-ish than I am, and nerds are everyone who know slightly more about Star Trek than I do. Essentially, I'm the center of the world, and JFK knew it. Right?

www.cuttingroomcomic.com - a twice a week webcomic about recently released and upcoming movies.

This is what bugs the heck out of me about the Peters Projection (http://www.petersmap.com) -- it's not the projection itself, which is kinda neat. It's the stick-stone stupid justifications for using the projection (like http://www.petersmap.com/page2.html), especially the quite-simply-factually-incorrect North-vs-South argument (http://www.petersmap.com/page4.html): "The North is 18.9 million square miles. The South is 38.6 million square miles." But they draw the North/South line around latitude 25 north (i.e. the southern border of the US) in the Western Hemisphere and even farther north in the Eastern Hemisphere. Ridiculous.

There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, constructing a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas? We choose to go and construct a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars. We choose to go and construct a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

"But why, some say, constructing a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?"

I was really glad I didn't happen to be drinking anything when I got to that last sentence ..

Felona wrote:"The great battlefield for the defense and expansion of freedom today is the whole southern half of the globe, Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East."

Problem solved. The only thing that makes this statement nonsensical is punctuation, which isn't spoken.

No, you would definitely be able to tell the difference between a comma and a dash in that position. That's why a dash was used by the transcriber. If it had sounded like he meant it to be one of a list, the transcriber would certainly have used a comma.

In addition, had the scriptwriter intended it to be one member of a list, he would have moved it to the end, because it fits at the end of a clause better than "Middle East". But it was evidently written the way it is because "whole southern half of the globe" is meant for one demographic – those with the short attention span – while the second part was for those able to place those regions on a map.

Now, in an age where every schoolchild learns fractions, it's hard to imagine. But "half" used to mean "1 of 2" rather than "1/2". Two parts, but not necessarily equal parts.

Scary linguistic anomalies of bygone ages.

Actually, it meant "side", and was used originally as a subtraction from a number, so "half third" (þridda healf) meant "two and a half". You can still see this in the way modern Dutch (English's closest relative) talks about times: half drie ("half three") is 14:30, not 15:30.

I suspect the "lf" of half is related to the "lve" and "lev" of 12 and 11 – i.e. Gothic lif, ten.

Now, in an age where every schoolchild learns fractions, it's hard to imagine. But "half" used to mean "1 of 2" rather than "1/2". Two parts, but not necessarily equal parts.

Scary linguistic anomalies of bygone ages.

Actually, it meant "side", and was used originally as a subtraction from a number, so "half third" (þridda healf) meant "two and a half". You can still see this in the way modern Dutch (English's closest relative) talks about times: half drie ("half three") is 14:30, not 15:30.

I suspect the "lf" of half is related to the "lve" and "lev" of 12 and 11 – i.e. Gothic lif, ten.

Same in Denmark. Halv tre meaning half three is also used as half past 2 would be in English, i.e. 14:30. But we take it one step further.

Halvtreds means 50 in Danish. It's an abbreviation of halvtredsindstyvende, which is halv tredje sinde tyvende. Sinde means times and tyvende means 20. And halv tre here means half third, i.e. two and a half. So it says two and a half times 20, i.e. 50. We use the same way for 60 (tres, tresindstyvende), 70 (halvfjerds, halvfjerdsindstyvende), 80 (firs, firsindstyvende) and 90 (halvfems, halvfemsindstyvende).

I have traveled from 1979 to be a member of the unofficial board Council of Elders. Phear M3

As someone said earlier, he could have been referring to population in which case the dividing line would be further north and he would have been close. The diving line back then was probably about the bottom of the US--this would put Vietnam, Laos, parts of the Middle East, most of Africa, and all of Central/South America in the southern half.

. . . Yes JFK did have a globe. His reference was consistent with the following geo-politics of the time:

1. Colour Russia as part of europe, not asia.2. Draw your reference line further North (think northern tropical line, or actually the mexican border)

"North" and "South" can be relative measures to where you stand, not references to the equator. In this case the the dominant discussion was "North vs. South" in terms of the "developed" North (including europe and Russia and Japan), and the "underdeveloped" or "developing" South. China was not in a dialog position at the time and was contiguous to the South if you insisted on including tghem. This terminology is not obvious today since India and many Asian nations had huge economic booms post JFK and are leaders today.

The joke in #753 (and it is funny) brings out an interesting cultural blind-spot between the science/math orientation and the socio-political orientiation. Why assume that North and South referred to the equator since they are used subjectively as relative references on a common basis? So part of the joke, for me anyways, si that the "objective" science/math viewpoint is often not, as in this case. Ironically, being aware of the subjective usage is part of a truly objective reference set.

Yes, JFK owned a globe. Does Randall Munroe own an International Relations textbook? I'm guessing not.

Seriously, I usually love xkcd but this comic is really annoyingly dumb. It combines ignorance of a very basic geopolitical concept with a math geek's borderline-Asperger's-ish inability to consider that "Southern half of the globe" might mean something other than the geometric Southern Hemisphere.

2.So the whole point of the comic is "JFK said something possibly dumb about 50 years later". Yeah... and so?

3.As has been said, "southern half of the globe" may have a completely different connotation from what Randall is thinking, so now only is Randall being pedantic and out of date, he's being incorrectly pedantic and out of date. TV Tropes may add a new trope to the xkcd article:

It's a pet peeve of mine that, to a large extent, people use the "Global North" and "The West" to designate GDP-wealthy regions of the Globe, regardless of where they're located on said Globe.And don't get me started on the expression "The Middle East"...

What's most troubling, in this, is that these views are so ingrained by now that they dominate people's worldviews.There should be a list.

No, Africa isn't a country, it's a continent.

Yes, Egypt and Libya are indeed in Africa.

Yes, India is in Asia. So are Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Malaysia, Pakistan, most of Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkey...

The expression "Third World" was coined as a reference to "non-aligned" political entities during the so-called "Cold War" (the "First" and "Second" worlds were associated with capitalism and socialism/communism, respectively).

The "Centre of the World" could be located anywhere. The fact that the "Prime Meridian" is located in Western Europe is a matter of convention, it's not a fact of nature.

When the Globe is represented in 2D, several things are skewed. Familiarizing yourself with the globe should help you understand a thing or two about the World.

I'm sure this has been stated before in this thread, but reading comments on the Internet almost always just makes me angry so I'm not going to read through it and find out. JFK was referring to the Global South, an economic distinction, not geographic. The south in those terms is third world countries, and it's geographic to the extent that most first and second world countries are to the north of the third world. Maybe saying "southern half of the globe" confused things a little, but it still makes sense, especially at that time.

mattdm wrote:Step away from your globes for a minute and look at the standard Mercator projection map of the world that is unfortunately still very dominant. It has Germany in the dead center. This pushes the equator way down, and all of the named places do indeed appear to be in the southern part of the world. (If we take "Asia" to have the USSR subtracted from it.)

You must be referring to a different Mercator projection than the rest of the world, for that one usually goes from 90°N to 90°S and often from 180°W to 180°E.

LucasBrown wrote: "Also, if you read his speech at Rice, all his arguments for going to the moon work equally well as arguments for blowing up the moon, sending cloned dinosaurs into space, or constructing a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars."

Well, I'm convinced. When do we start the mission to build penis-shaped obelisk on Mars?

Ok, we start by blowing up the moon. The we send the dinosaurs out to build the obelisk on Mars out of Lunar debris.

The thing that bugs me is that everyone is so fixated on the obelisk, I'd much rather send the cloned dinosaurs into space! Space dinosaurs! We could have a T-rex, some raptors, a triceratops and whatever else we wanted. When they got back from space we could put them on an island and then charge people for tours. It wouldn't be like that other time, these would be space dinosaurs, so nothing would go wrong as long as they don't develop super-powers and/or hover-boards.

LucasBrown wrote: "Also, if you read his speech at Rice, all his arguments for going to the moon work equally well as arguments for blowing up the moon, sending cloned dinosaurs into space, or constructing a towering penis-shaped obelisk on Mars."

Well, I'm convinced. When do we start the mission to build penis-shaped obelisk on Mars?

Ok, we start by blowing up the moon. The we send the dinosaurs out to build the obelisk on Mars out of Lunar debris.

Here we see a artist's conception of phase 3 of the plan.

I happen to notice there´s too little Penis for a penis-shaped obelisc.otherwise i would agree with your plan.

What'sInAName wrote:You got yours up first because I waited for the alt text to appear before posting...

Call me picky, but I hope you all know it is really the "title" text you're talking about. (The fact that "alt" ever appeared as a tooltip was not only wrong according to the standards but also an encouragement for Web coders to abuse its intent.)

Don't worry, I'll go back to my cave to blog about the semantic Web now.

s0merand0mdude wrote:Another thing that bugs me; the Middle East appears to have become its own continent. There needs to be an East Asia and a West Asia, because then everybody would know that the Middle East actually is in Asia.

CorruptUser wrote:Also been bugging me; Latin America means the countries in the Americas with a Latin-based language, so doesn't that include French? So isn't Quebec and Lousianna also part of Latin America?

Well, if you want to make that argument, English has a lot of roots in Latin as well...

The majority of English words are Germanic. English is a Germanic language with only some borrowed Latin vocabulary.

As has been pointed out by many, anyone who's even remotely familiar with academic political economics, sociology and/or related disciplines, this is a clearly a reference to North-South divide.

Enderverse, the use of the term "the South" in a global sense ("global" to mean in the general sense) to mean the poor has been in use for centuries, in more than one language. At least, more than one language I'm familiar with.

"Global" doesn't always have to refer to a physical globe. Sometimes, it can refer to the planet in a metaphorical sense or things in a general sense. I'd think a bunch of people might have at one point or another declared a global variable would be familiar with this concept.

As for "half," again, figure of speech.

Seriously, this comic is just dumb, right on the level of a "Research? What are you looking for again?" joke.